Hi, I think I'm going to make myself unpopular.
Reading this document as a proposed standard, I think it will confuse the reader. I think that what we actually need is a 100% replacement of RFC 3484, that can be read on its own. (We've been here before - the same argument is why we ended up doing 3697bis.) If that is not done, I would suggest reorganising the text so that (after a short Introduction) the reader finds: - firstly, a complete but concise statement of the normative changes made to 3484 (such as section 2.1.5, and the new rules 5.1 and 9) - secondly, the explanations (such as sections 2.1.1-2.1.4). An implementer would only need to read the first part. Trivia: Needs a header: Updates: 3484 (if approved) > 4. IANA Considerations > > Address type number for the policy table may have to be assigned by > IANA. You can't say "may", you have to tell IANA exactly what to do in which registry. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
